The oldest and largest nonprofit law firm dedicated to asserting and defending the rights of Indian tribes, organizations and individuals nationwide.

Thursday, August 1, 2013

NARF files complaint in federal district court to protect the civil rights of Veronica Brown; supporters issue Statement of Support to stop violation of Veronica’s civil rights by South Carolina courts

On July 31, the Native American Rights Fund filed
a complaint in the United States District Court in South Carolina to protect
the civil rights of Veronica Brown, a citizen of the Cherokee Nation who has
been denied due process in the South Carolina courts. The filing comes after
the South Carolina Supreme Court issued two controversial orders to the state’s
family court on July 17 and 24, calling for the removal of Veronica from her
father and a transfer her to the adoptive couple without a hearing of best
interest.

The lawsuit was supported in a national
statement released on July 31 by a broad coalition of civil rights, child welfare,
adoption advocates, legal authorities, tribal governments, and Native American
advocacy groups. These groups and individuals joined with the National Congress
of American Indians, Native American Rights Fund, and National Indian Child
Welfare Association in releasing the national statement of support for
Veronica’s civil rights, and the rights of all children, to a hearing of best
interest.

The litigation was filed on behalf of
Veronica, by Angel Smith, an attorney appointed as counsel for the child by the
courts of the Cherokee Nation, in U.S. District Court in South Carolina, and
asks the Court to determine whether Veronica has a constitutionally protected
right to a meaningful hearing in the state courts to determine what is in her
best interests. Furthermore, the litigation asserts that Veronica, as an
“Indian child” under the Indian Child Welfare Act, has a federally protected
right to have the state courts fully consider and appropriately weigh her best
interests as an Indian child. Daniel E. Martin, Jr., the judge for the family
court system of South Carolina, is named as the defendant in the suit.

According to the filing, Veronica “doubtless
has a liberty interest in remaining with her father and such an interest
justifies at a minimum a plenary hearing on her current status, her
relationships with others and her genuine need for stability . . . Despite the
finding of the family court and the implicit assumption by the Supreme Court of
South Carolina that [Veronica’s] best interest would be served by being with
her father, two years later the court now determines, despite the passage of
time and [Veronica’s] stage of development at age four, that her ‘best’
interests will now be served by being removed from him and given back to the
adoptive couple. Again, this order is without any consideration to the present
circumstances, psychological and emotional well-being, and future impact on
[Veronica]. This is an arbitrary result, depriving [Veronica] of any
opportunity to be heard on her own behalf, irrespective of the competing
interests of the adult litigants in her young life.”

On July 31, on behalf of a broad coalition of
civil rights, child welfare, legal authorities, tribal governments and Native
American advocacy groups, the National Congress of American Indians, along with
the Native American Rights Fund and the National Indian Child Welfare
Association released a national statement of support for Veronica’s civil
rights to be upheld. The statement of support has been endorsed by a broad
coalition of tribal governments, state and federal legal authorities including
two state attorneys general—Arizona and New Mexico—civil rights institutions
such as the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, child welfare and
adoption organizations including the Child Welfare League of America, and
leading national and regional Native advocacy organizations representing the
interests of almost every tribe located within the United States (see full list
below). To read the letter, click here.

According to the letter:

[T]he rights promised to our children are
being compromised in the courts of the State of South Carolina . . . The recent
[South Carolina Supreme Court] ruling in the case denies the basic fundamental
right of an almost four-year-old Indian child to a hearing of her ‘best
interests’ before removing her from her biological father after almost two
years of child-rearing, bonding and establishing a loving home environment.
Plainly stated, this is a denial of Veronica’s human rights and constitutional
rights to due process as a citizen of the United States.

The following organizations and individuals
have signed on to the letter of support for the civil rights lawsuit being
filed on behalf of Veronica:

Attorneys General

The Office of Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne

Attorney General of the State of New Mexico Gary K. King

Civil Rights, Child Welfare, and Adoption
Advocacy Organizations

The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights

Child Welfare League of America

North American Council on Adoptable Children

Voice for Adoption

Consortium for Children

Adopt America Network

The Adoption Exchange

Spaulding for Children

Three Rivers Adoption Council

Applied Research Center

Asian Americans Advancing Justice—AAJC

Asian & Pacific Islander American Health Forum

Center for Social Inclusion

Demos

Friends Committee on National Legislation

League of Rural Voters

National Latino Farmers & Ranchers Trade Association

Tribal Nations in Support

Cherokee Nation - Principal ChiefBill John Baker

California Valley Miwok Tribe - Chairperson Silvia Burley

Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska - Vice President Lowell Halverson

Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation - Les Minthorn, Chairman of the Board of Trustees

Carla F. Fredericks, Co-Director, American Indian Law Program Associate Clinical Professor of Law University of Colorado Law School

Eric Eberhard, Distinguished Indian Law Practitioner in Residence, Center for Indian Law and Policy, Seattle University School of Law

Jennifer Weddle, Chair, Federal Bar Association Indian Law Section

Kristen Carpenter, Co-Director, American Indian Law Program Associate Professor of Law University of Colorado Law School

Lorie M. Graham, Professor of Law, Co-Director, International Law Concentration Suffolk University Law School

Background

On July 17 and July 24, the South Carolina Supreme Court issued two
controversial orders to the state’s family court calling for an expedited
transfer of Veronica Brown to the South Carolina-based adoptive couple without
a hearing of best interest. It is standard procedure that all custodial
transfers, including adoption proceedings, require a hearing to determine the
best interest of the child in advance of any transfer proceedings, an essential
step the South Carolina Supreme Court failed to take, thus denying Veronica the
right to have her best interests considered. One year ago the South Carolina
Supreme Court, followed the family court’s finding that it was in the best
interest of Veronica to be with her father stating: “Likewise, we cannot say
that Baby Girl's best interests are not served by the grant of custody to
Father, as Appellants have not presented evidence that Baby Girl would not be
safe, loved, and cared for if raised by Father and his family.”